416 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



[December, 



Rom^ey Abbey church was founded in the 10th century, but there 

 does not seem to be reason to believe that the present building has 

 any part* of that date. The most ancient portion of the church as it 

 now stands, is probably the work of the same Henry de Blois who 

 built St. Cross, in the middle of the 12th century. It is remarkable 

 for having a small chapel with semi-circular absis, on the east side of 

 each arm of the transept. The ailes of the choir likewise terminate 

 in a semi-circular absis formed in the thickness of the wall, so as not 

 to show externally. The choir, now used for divine service (which 

 doubtless originally terminated in a similar absis) and the transept, 

 are Norman: the greater part of the nave, excepting the walls, is of 

 Early English. The west end contains a singularly loftv triple lancet 

 window. According to those who maintain the necessity for symbolic 

 design in churches, a triplet, which they consider to represent the 

 Trinity, should be confined to the east end ; to place it at the west 

 end, they say, is a decided fault. We have here one instance, at all 

 events, and by no means a single one, that this was not always recog- 

 nised by our forefathers. 



In the south wall of the nave next the transept, one of the original 

 Norman doorways remains, and is now used as a window. It presents 

 a series of concentric arches adorned with various sculptured enrich- 

 ments, and supported by two columns on either side, with enriched 

 capitals. In the external wall of the south transept) next the door, is 

 a curious sculptured figure of Christ on the cross, about oi feet high, 

 with a hand from the clouds above pointing to it. Near it is a small 

 recess in the wall, probably to receive a lamp or taper. The present 

 appearance of the east end of the choir internally is very picturesque, 

 and may be advantageously studied. Some of the capitals in the 

 aili . at the east end, are sculptured with figures of singular appear- 

 ance, and have led to three communications to the Societv of Anti- 

 quaries, printed in the "Arcbeologia."' 8 



The font is square, supported on five square pillars panelled. In 

 minute points of interest (his church is abundant. There are several 

 interesting monuments and monumental slabs, some of which present 

 curious examples of crosses and croaks. Unfortunately 

 the persons whom they were intended to commemorate, have, in too 

 many instances, disappeared : 



" So perish monuments of mortal birth. 

 So perish all in turn, save » i Orth." 



Amongst the modern works, the last effort of Flaxraan, a monument to 

 the memory of Henry Viscount Palmerston and Mary his wife, should 

 not escape notice. It is to be observed with much regret that this 

 interesting building is, in many parts, in a very bad state of repair: 

 and that unless some efforts be made to maintain it before decav pro- 

 reed much further, but little of this structure will remain for succeed- 

 ing generations. 



In the foregoing brief remarks, the writer has had occasion to allude 

 incidentally to symbolic architecture, and he cannot avoid availing 

 himself of the opportunity which here oilers itself to add one obser- 

 vation in connexion with it. He has been accused by some influential 

 persons of having in "A Chapter on Church-building," (published in 

 the Civ Architect's Juurnal and afterwards reprinted in 



some of the daily journals! urge,: linent importance of 



symbolism, and the desirableness of the re-introduction of details, and 

 arrangements fitted Only for the Romish faith. Now if this were la- 

 opinion, he would feel no hesitation in respectfully maintaining it: 

 '• It' I. my Lord, fur nv. 

 > I 

 Ami keep mc on the side where stdl I am : " 

 but it is not so. The little paper in question contained, it is true, a 

 resume of the opinions to that effect recently urged by some eccle- 

 siological writers ; but the motive of the paper was rather to utter a 

 protest against their reception than to urge their adoption, as he ven- 

 tures to think must be quite evident to those who have happened to 

 read the whole of it. To quote one sentence from the paper iu ques- 

 tion: " We would most worthily adorn the house of God, to render it, 

 to the extent of our means, fitting for its high purpose; but at the 

 same time we would carefully avoid all proceedings, however agree- 

 able to our temperament, however enticing to us as an artist, which 

 should give undue importance to bricks and stones, and man's inven- 

 tions and devices, which should increase the number of ceremonial 

 vances, which should threaten to exalt the shadow in the place 

 of the substance, and so lead to a state of things which did once result 

 from such a course, and may result again, notwithstanding the in- 

 creased amount of information possessed, and the general comparative 

 enlightenment." 



s From Dr. Latham, Vol. XIV. p. I3« : from Sir H. U. Englefiekl, follow- 

 ing the former ; ami from U . Latham. Esq., Vol. XV, p. 304. 



BRITISH MUSEUM. 



Sir — I have heard, upon what I consider tolerably good authority, 

 the information coming to me at only one remove from the party him- 

 self, that a Mr. B., a gentleman in the University of Oxford, is getting 

 up a design for the British Museum, in opposition to Smirke's; and 

 intends to bring it before the Trustees in such manner that they cannot 

 possibly avoid formally noticing it in some way or other. Yet, al- 

 though I do not question the truth of this as far as mere intention goes, 

 I doubt very much indeed if anything whatever comes of it. 



With whatever ardour and alacrity they may be projected, enter- 

 prises of the kind are apt to break down very soon, and the mercury 

 of zeal to sink very quickly from the boiling point to zero. Even 

 well-wishers to it must consider such an attempt on the part of an 

 individual, somewhat Quixotic ; the greater probability, therefore, is 

 that nothing more will ever be heard of it. 



Although I agree with many others that the design actually adopted 

 is almost the very last which ought to be so, I certainly cannot agree 

 with your correspondent Dr. Fulton, who recommends the Egyptian 

 style as a very suitable one for the occasion. To me it appears emi- 

 nently the reverse, for that style is not only not a national but not 

 even an adoptive one, nor at all naturalized among us in the slightest 

 degree. I do not say it ought never to be employed by us, for 

 any purpose, or under any circumstances, but I certainly am of opinion 

 that to employ for a public and national structure what is'not even an 

 European style, would partake of absurdity, notwithstanding that the 

 Museum contains a great number of Egyptian antiquities. Even a 

 Gothic facade would quite as well agree with the interior of the 

 edifice. 



In regard to this last remark, it may be said that Sir R. Smirke's 

 own facade will prove a better index to the interior, and prepare 

 strangers better for the taste there displayed, than a design which, by 

 rendering the exterior more imposing, uvuld be a sort of architectural 

 imposition, and lead people to expect a corresponding degree of ar- 

 chitectural beauty within; nor is there any denying that such is iu 

 ■grce the case. Still there are attractions of another kind 

 within, and that they are reckoned all-sufficient is evident, for, with 

 the exception of the Royal Library, no part of the interior makes any 

 pretension to architectural effect or beauty. The staircases — where, 

 if no where else, some display of the kind is apt to be looked for — are 

 remarkable for nothing so much as their ugliness: they might be all 

 very decent and tolerable in an hospital, but in a national museum they 

 i i nable. 



Some of your " contrumperies " — as Mrs. Malaprop would call 

 them — have expressed a hope that Smirke would, on tins important 

 on, give us something at last trulv noble, and a perfected design 

 worthy to rank as a work of art. Yet, however well-meant, this is 

 surely preposterous, for how is a man to give us all at once what all his 

 other works — the occupations of a lifetime — prove him not to possess 

 iu the slightest degree — at any rate only in the lowest degree. You 

 might as well hope to turn a brewer's drayhorse into a racer in his 

 old age. These remarks are, I must own, not particularly courteous, 

 but Sir Robert Smirke may consider himself very lucky, if he be not 

 doomed to hear by and bye others far more galling— such as will cause 

 him to curse the British Museum and the hour he became connected 

 with it. 



I remain, &c, 



J. W. R. 



Mr. Editor — I can't for the life of me make out why you and some 

 others should be getting up such a precious rumpus 'bout the British 

 .Museum. We John Bulls want none of your outlandish Germany 

 doings — none of your Glyposticks and Wal-fiddlesticks — none of your 

 Polly-Stiles and Polly-Crome — in short, none of your arrant paganism 

 — your base-reliefs and yWs/ry-painting— all which I take to be ex- 

 ceedingly expensive : but merely something smartish as one may say, 

 yet that will not make our pockets smart for it. 



Now, to my mind, there is a capital model to go by, all ready cut 

 out for us, and a real Museum it is too, into the bargain, though uot 

 such a big bouncing one as that in Great Russell Street. I mean the 

 one in Lincoln's Inn Fields: now that I call a tasty, sensible sort of a 

 thing — genteelish and quite tippy. What the inside may be 1 can't 

 say, fur there, as I'm told, they let in only the quality people, but it 

 looks a snuggish, comfortable-like place enough. 



As to the Big British, 'tis of no use for you or any other body to 

 make a botheration 'bout it now, 'cause the /ace-had, as you call it, is 

 begun, and getting on swimmingly, so you may as well all hold your 

 tongues. 



One of the Million. 



